>MM, > >It is a hilarious and funny article, the subject is not, but the way the >Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist approaches the issue. Also this bit >about China, whose population is using a few percent of the Americans >usage, per capita. If the Chinese used as much as the Americans, per >capita, they would need all available oil production in the world, only for >them. How can they dare to go and buy so much of the Americans oil? Only >because it happens that it is located under other countries surface, is not >reason enough. Anyway, I guess that the National Association of Attorneys >General, will sort this out. LOL > >Maybe it is time to "win the hearts and minds" of the Chinese people and >liberate them. US cannot allow their irresponsible use and demands for more >oil. It is evil!!!
ROFL!! They just can't see it, eh? But maybe it's Chavez who's to blame for calling Bush an AH and threatening to shut the oil tap if the US doesn't back off - resultant market jitters inflate prices. Or something. If Chavez only had the good grace to emigrate at gunpoint to Bangui there wouldn't be a problem. And then this unfortunate person would be able to use BOTH her cars: >"I think it's ridiculous. I have two cars and I have to put premium >in it. It's not good for me right now," driver Angela Majors said. >"The one that costs the most gas stays parked for the week." So why does she need two cars at all then? (What's a market jitter anyway, a GMO gremlin?) Best Keith >Your assumption about American oil is right. If US only relayed on their >own known reserves, they would last for 10 years. If they are very lucky, >they will find some more and it would last around 15 years. For Natural Gas >it is 7 and 10 years. > >Hakan > >. >At 00:58 10/03/2004, you wrote: > ><http://www.themilwaukeechannel.com/automotive/2908995/detail.html> >http://www.themilwaukeechannel.com/automotive/2908995/detail.html > > > >My view: > > > >I think there are some AM talk-show hosts and other public-discourse > >participants who think that a very large portion of this is due to the > >refusal of the U.S. Government to allow domestic production of fuel. > > > >In a way they're right, but not if we are only talking about fossil > >fuels. I think the amount of Oil we could produce here, if we opened > >up every spigot possible and got out of the way of every potential > >field, would not cover our shortfalls at what most consider a > >reasonable price, nor address any potential looming global warming > >liabilities. > > > >It would not allow us to stop importing, that I'm aware. The > >estimates I've seen for Alaskan Oil are roughly 1 million barrels per > >day, give or take, and those were generous estimates, severely raised > >from the estimates made just a decade or less ago at the DOE site. > >And to be clear: at some point the Alaskan fields, which would take > >some years to develop, would decrease in output, just as happened in > >Texas and Oklahoma? > > > >And yet we in the US are using *20 MILLION* barrels of oil per day! > >And our production shortfall (the amount we need to import) is between > >9 and 11 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY! And we think that increasing > >production in Alaska and a few other fields would really solve that > >problem? > > > >What it would do is temporarily help the problem a bit, but it would > >not, by any stretch of the imagination, "solve" the problem. > > > >In any event, my vote is to consider this ongoing fuel-pricing concern > >as a multi-faceted challenge which will demand of us that we address > >it with some real effort, maybe even making a few big mistakes, but I > >think it has to be addressed on a number of levels, with a variety of > >different technologies and efforts. > > > >If Battery EVs continue to be conspicuously and unfairly excluded from > >consideration, based on disingenuous and partly-false claims about > >lack of demand and lack of performance of advanced batteries and > >what-not, then I don't see why we advocates of real solutions to the > >fuel pricing problems should listen at all to talk about drilling in > >Alaska. We're asking that all potentially contributory solutions be > >considered fairly, without unnecessarily choosing one to the exclusion > >of all others, and one of the most promising partial solutions is > >dismissed out of hand with some real dishonesty. > > > >This does not bode well for further dialogue. > > > >I like the bit about us blaming the Chinese for their > >"over-consumption". Heh. I'm sorry but a lot of this really is just > >too funny. I wonder what we've been doing. Not over-consuming? > > > >At least the Chinese have dozens of thousands of people in > >Universities and Laboratories and serious manufacturing plants working > >feverishly and sincerely on all manner of alternative-fuel solutions. > >In advanced batteries alone, I see more indication of serious Chinese > >work than almost anywhere else. > > > >What are we doing to equal that? We are taking sorely for-granted our > >own comparable (smaller number of) people who set the challenges for > >themselves, and pretending their patent rights are crap and their > >business rights (to work without horrific red tape) are nonsense and > >that their inventions don't work or aren't wanted.... where in fact > >their products might work for some and might be wanted by some.... > >whose voices aren't heard because the press and the government turn a > >deaf ear. > > > >MM Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
